Cost Analysis: Trubrain Proprietary Nootropic Blend vs. Generic Equivalent • Hacker News Board

Re: Cost Analysis: Trubrain Proprietary Nootropic Blend vs. Generic Equivalent

#11

Post by freehunter » Fri, Aug 09, 2013, 12:06 AM UTC

SapphireSun wrote: post #7

iknowno_one wrote: post #6

It's funny to me that no one has ever claimed to have accomplished anything globally significant while using nootropics to my knowledge. Mood elevators or stimulants, sure. Hitler was all into those. But, nootropics? I mean, I guess it depends on where you draw the line of what is considered one.

Coffee. (Although I'm not totally sure that's considered a nootropic in this context.)

Nicotine.

Adderall.

Again, probably not nootropics, but they serve the same function: wake your brain up enough to accomplish something you may not have had the cognitive ability to do without it.

Re: Cost Analysis: Trubrain Proprietary Nootropic Blend vs. Generic Equivalent

#12

Post by thaumaturgy » Fri, Aug 09, 2013, 12:43 AM UTC

iknowno_one wrote: post #6

It's funny to me that no one has ever claimed to have accomplished anything globally significant while using nootropics to my knowledge. Mood elevators or stimulants, sure. Hitler was all into those. But, nootropics? I mean, I guess it depends on where you draw the line of what is considered one.

Adderall is generally included under "nootropics", and is a stimulant. Its precursor was Benzedrine, which was used by some names you might recognize: W.H. Auden, James Agee, Graham Greene, Philip K. Dick, John-Paul Sartre, Paul Erdös, Jack Kerouac. The latter wrote "On The Road" in three weeks while under its influence.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_exa...

Re: Cost Analysis: Trubrain Proprietary Nootropic Blend vs. Generic Equivalent

#13

Post by gwern » Fri, Aug 09, 2013, 2:34 AM UTC

iknowno_one wrote: post #6

It's funny to me that no one has ever claimed to have accomplished anything globally significant while using nootropics to my knowledge. Mood elevators or stimulants, sure. Hitler was all into those. But, nootropics? I mean, I guess it depends on where you draw the line of what is considered one.

> It's funny to me that no one has ever claimed to have accomplished anything globally significant while using nootropics to my knowledge.

These drugs are not always legal to use by normal people (eg. modafinil) and even when they are, why would you admit them? And even when they admit them, you haven't heard of them (the Nobelist who found NGF credits NGF for her scientific productivity; the only reason you don't hear of NGF supplementation is that it is insanely expensive and you could only afford it if, well, you had your own lab synthesizing NGF).

We know that a lot of scientists and other such researchers use amphetamines and modafinil because they say so in surveys like the famous one in _Nature_; yet you do not hear 20% of them publicly thanking modafinil for helping them get their experiments or work done.

Re: Cost Analysis: Trubrain Proprietary Nootropic Blend vs. Generic Equivalent

#14

Post by gwern » Fri, Aug 09, 2013, 5:32 PM UTC

yesimahuman wrote: post #9

Curious how this compares to something like Modafinil, or other Nootropics?

TruBrain gave me a month's supply to try it out (http://www.gwern.net/Nootropics#trubrain) and I'd say that, as one would expect since it's not including any heavy-duty stimulants, the effects are weaker than modafinil or nicotine. I think it's more effective than just a normal piracetam+choline stack, but it's hard to be sure. (But on the plus side, it's legal and doesn't come with any concerns about legality (for modafinil) or addiction/social-disapproval (nicotine).)